Well Pavel I cannot wait any longer or spend any more time lying awake at night trying to work out your fiendish clues so here is my submission ...
1. For some time I was fairly sure that this was one of a number of “flex control inserts” for Salomon boots. I was sure I remembered seeing this type of thing on the market – You bought the standard boot and then installed the appropriate insert whose “squishiness” met your personal requirement. But then I thought no. I then spent sometime thinking it was a binding hold drilling guide (again for Salomon) but however I looked at it I couldn’t work out why the top surface would need to be inclined if this was it’s purpose. I have now settled on an answer which I am convinced in wrong because I can’t make your clue work with my answer (never a good start!) So my answer is: A device to prevent ski tips from crossing. I am sure there was a trade name for them but advancing age prevents me from recalling it! I think the holes are both to allow fitment on a range of different ski tops and makes and also to reduce weight. I suspect that they are no longer needed because the introduction of shorter skis has reduced the tendency of skis to cross.
2. Ok, now we enter the realm of “The Sleep Deprivation” question … Again I don’t immediately know the answer but hopefully like my old maths master used to tell me, “Show your workings and then even if you get the answer wrong you will get some for method!”. Firstly, my observations:
• The device appears to be made from metal – Is this for strength of to dissipate heat or perhaps for both?
• There is an area between to two raised sides that looks to have less white powder deposit on it – Could this be because this is where a ski is located?
• The two raised areas have semicircular holes – Is this for attaching some other element of the process?
• The overall impression of the metal is that it has been exposed to some kind of heat process and we see the flux residue. Equally the white powder could be wax, although it looks too dense.
• The two ends are reduced in thickness – Why would this be important to the function of the device? At one point I thought that this was an old version of a “Ski service boot” that allows the person servicing the ski to insert this into the binding and then invert the ski and mount it on a bench to work on the base – This doesn’t really make sense because you would need a different plate for every different boot sole length and anyway the ends are the wrong shape to fit a binding properly. So why are the ends thinner?
• Reviewing your clue I am more and more convinced that those teeth are not intended to be used to remove any material from the ski. They certainly aren’t sharp enough to remove edge metal so that leaves them as some form of clamp / retainer, but the distance between them cannot be varied so they must be designed for a specific ski / binding configuration.
• So my final answer is that this is the worlds most over engineered device to support a ski whilst at the same time clamping the (Tyrolia) brakes out of the way to allow base servicing. For an extra point I suggest that there are additional elements required to make this item fully functional.
3. I think this must come down to shape (as mentioned by others) but more specifically their shape to out-do the opposition, respectively, Other cars, The Enemy and Other ski manufacturers. It is the adoption of this “new” shape before the “opposition” can find an answer that allows success.
4. I think that this answer boils down to one of the phrases “monocoque” or “composite” but my automotive history isn’t strong enough to explain my reasoning. What I do know is that Porsche is one of the very few sports car manufacturers that employ the monocoque construction technique (the tooling costs are prohibitively high I understand). As for ski manufacturers, presumably the concept of manufacturing skis from a range of different layers rather than a single strong core (like a chassis in a Model T Ford and later) was prompted by Ferdinand’s designs although this is conjecture.
5. Cervinia &
Heavenly – Although if Ski Areas are allowed either “The Porte du Soleil” or “Espace San Bernardo” would both qualify.
6. Pass.
7. Now this might be a little controversial but I believe this is a question about weight distribution both in a fore-aft direction and a left-right direction. My only hesitation about this answer is that not all skiers are bipods, which would discount the left-right aspect but here is the thinking: Assuming that the total of all forces acting on the snow is X then dividing these forces equally between both feet gives Y, an optimal force distribution for efficient carving. Equally, if the total force applied to the ski is X then to achieve a neutral and optimal stance the forces should be applied equally to the front and rear of the ski or X/2 = Y where Y is the force applied to each half of the ski. Gaussian theory is intimately involved with distribution involving symmetry which would perhaps explain the clue.
8. These are all pieces of information required by ski hire / ski shops in order to provide you with the best match of equipment to your individual requirements.
a. 3 – Self Assessed Ability rating. Many systems exist where 1 = Total Novice, 6 = Expert or possibly I = Novice, II = Intermediate & III = Expert
b. 68 - Mass in Kg
c. 48 - Age in years
d. 255 - Boot Sole Length
e. 7 - DIN setting (although in many cases the shop should probably calculate this for you!)
9.
a. Probably not strictly classed as “equipment” but the introduction of the hinged slalom pole has probably had more influence on that particular discipline than any worn by the racer – It allowed the development of the “cross lead” where the racer can take the pole at ankle height using the outside hand to “clear” the pole and so with a fanfare of trumpets we unveil the need for your legendary “Racing Gloves”! Prior to this, heavily ribbed tops were worn to clear the gate by extending the inside arm forward thus allowing the pole to slide past, bearing in mind the pole was solid and did not flex on impact.
b. Cat-suit material has a huge effect on the performance of downhill racers, so much so that exacting limits are set for the porosity of the material – Who can forget Ken Read having to hand over 1st place to his team mate Steve Podborski in
Morzine, France in 1979 when Ken’s suit failed the porosity test!
c. Finally it has to be that topic that is never far from our thoughts – Wax. Probably the subject of more conjecture, discussion, pseudo-science and confusion than any other topic in skiing. However, with continued development modern waxes play an extremely important role in Alpine racing, probably contributing at least as much to ultimate winning times as any other single piece of equipment.
10. I just don’t know enough about North American Ski history to be able to answer this with any real confidence but just to give an answer I’m going to say “The day Mount Saint Helen exploded” …
And now for a good nights sleep :)
Jan
